A Hobo Wedding

[LizzieMaine]

I mean it generally. If you were walking down the street and saw someone dressed in a way you didn't like, do you have the right to insult them to their face, "because if you didn't want to be insulted you shouldn't have gone out dressed like that?"

Aside from Ms. Killer's extraordinary hypocrisy -- she expects people to "understand the context" of her own potentially offensive photos, but makes no effort to understand any one else's context -- I think the implications for this kind of stuff are very destructive to any kind of a decent society. All of society is the victim when people think they can swagger around insisting anything and everything are open to insult and ridicule and damn the feelings of those involved. That's not civilization, that's a first-grade playground.

 

[Feraud]

Unfortunately, the anonymity of the internet has created a very diluted (warped?) sense of socialization. This lack of real social skill is further degraded by Advertising pushing an agenda for products you supposedly need to let everyone know (whether they want it or not..) what you are doing at every hour of every day. Some commericals push intruding on others and "sharing" it on some medial networking sites.

I find Regretsy too full of itself to be palatable.

 

[Stray Cat]

"because if you didn't want to be insulted you shouldn't have gone out dressed like that?"

No matter what they say, I believe in "You are what you wear". It is the power of perception! If you look like a hobo, you ARE a hobo. If you wear black clothes, you ARE goth (or Emo, or whatnot..). And if you wear WWII style, you MUST be someones grandma.
It is like that. We are tagged by what we appear like in front of people. And we tag others the same way.

 

[flat-top]

My wife frequents a forum that is beyond snark...it's downright vicious. She would never ever post of course, she just views as a guest from the sidelines. Sometimes she reads me some of the posts, bashing everything from how people look, the way they are dressed, their KIDS; it's pretty awful. Once I asked if the bashers themselves had ever posted pictures anywhere and my wife was able to come up with a few.....let's just say that in real life, these people could/ would/ should NEVER pass judgement on ANYONE. Cindy Crawford they ain't.
Internet Bullies. Truly sad.

 

[Stray Cat]

From their mouth into this screen: "Amen for Internet Anonymity".
By the way, we have a name for them: TROLLS!

 

[sheeplady]

I mean it generally. If you were walking down the street and saw someone dressed in a way you didn't like, do you have the right to insult them to their face, "because if you didn't want to be insulted you shouldn't have gone out dressed like that?"

I've personally gotten involved in a number of discussions here on the FL that amount to "try to be understanding about someone's situation before you criticize." I've been told by a number of members that there are no excuses for some behavior (dress at certain occasions). I have tried to maintain that one should do their best to maintain judgement about circumstances (context) around a situation unless they do know it. And while I admit I do not like some modern trends in dress or attitude, I try to keep an open mind about people, at least intially. Now, I am not always the best about this (I do and have jumped to conclusions far too often) and I admit it is something I struggle with but I am trying to be better about.

Is it possible that this couple has sympathy here primarily because they have done something that we can understand, and have experienced ourselves?

What if someone posted a wedding where the theme was throughly modern and something that most of us wouldn't personally go for as a "sign of the times"? How would we feel about a couple who had a wedding with low jeans (the kind that show your undies)? I'm sure a number of comments would be overwhelmingly negative. (I think it goes without saying that we'd be nicer as a group, but I am sure if that couple read our comments they would still be insulted.) We wouldn't understand the context any more than we understand about this couple- with one expection- most of us have experienced backlash for being vintage. Are we victimizing the low jeans couple- or is it suddenly ok to insult their public choices because it is not "to their face"?

 

[LizzieMaine]

Criticism of styles and trends is one thing -- that can and should be done without specific personal abuse. "The "Charlie Brown" look in menswear, of shorts, t-shirts, and baseball cap makes the wearer look topheavy and isn't very flattering." Criticism of specific individuals -- "hey look at that stupid slob at walmart. HAHAHAHA U SUK" is quite another.

If someone wanted to have a "hipster" or "goth" or "biker" or "rockabilly" wedding, and posted pictures of it, that's their own business, and shouldn't be seen as a call for smart-mouth commentary from the peanut gallery.

 

[Stray Cat]

..most of us have experienced backlash for being vintage.

Tagging.

I dislike and disapprove of all who tag people like that. Let them have their wedding. After all, most important thing to remember is: it was THEIR wedding, no? (or their dressing style, or their car.. you get where I'm going with this)

That is how I see it. Tolerance (my middle name).
I always say: "If they don't bother you, let them be". Easy as that..

 

[sheeplady]

I think we're agreeing with each other LizzieMaine. I can't see any problem with criticizing trends, but I do have a problem with criticizing people you don't know because people do have situations/context.

(The only exception to this is public figures who have obviously chosen a public lifestyle. And even then, people don't have to be overwhelmingly insulting and degrading.)

 

[C-dot]

I mean it generally. If you were walking down the street and saw someone dressed in a way you didn't like, do you have the right to insult them to their face, "because if you didn't want to be insulted you shouldn't have gone out dressed like that?"

There is a key difference between the internet and the "real-world," and this is anonymity. I'll take Feraud's statement a step further and say that internet socialization isn't just diluted, it's watered down beyond recognition. People come out of the woodwork that wouldn't say "boo" to you on the street and rip you to shreds - and they do it all behind the shield of a screen name. It doesn't help that the size of your internet audience is 1000x that of the aforementioned "real-world."

I'm not saying its right, and neither am I saying to blame the victim - I'm simply saying this is how it is. If you put yourself out onto the internet given its way of doing things, you have to be prepared to take the heat.

 

[rue]

There is a key difference between the internet and the "real-world," and this is anonymity. I'll take Feraud's statement a step further and say that internet socialization isn't just diluted, it's watered down beyond recognition. People come out of the woodwork that wouldn't say "boo" to you on the street and rip you to shreds - and they do it all behind the shield of a screen name. It doesn't help that the size of your internet audience is 1000x that of the aforementioned "real-world."

I'm not saying its right, and neither am I saying to blame the victim - I'm simply saying this is how it is. If you put yourself out onto the internet given its way of doing things, you have to be prepared to take the heat.

That's exactly why I stopped blogging. It was a simple blog about my family life and when the audience grew, the trolls came out and that was the end. It's a sad state of affairs when people are so bored with their own lives that they spend time critiquing someone else's life or in this case making fun of someone's wedding.

 

[LizzieMaine]

An unfortunate truth, yes. That *is* the way it is. But it *shouldn't* be -- every kind of injustice or evil or cultural stupidity in the history of the world has had people who just shrugged their shoulders and said "huh, that's just the way it is." Someone, somewhere, has to stand up and say *enough.*

Ms. Killer did say one thing I agree with. "The Internet" *is* us -- just a large number of individuals who have a personal choice in what we do and say and how we conduct ourselves. And when the day comes that we all have to conduct ourselves as though we expect to have our heads torn off by a pack of anonymous jackals at every turn, maybe it's time to just shut the whole thing down and write it off as a failed experiment in human nature. Once again, the Yahoos have won.

 

[C-dot]

That's exactly why I stopped blogging. ... It's a sad state of affairs when people are so bored with their own lives that they spend time critiquing someone else's life or in this case making fun of someone's wedding.

That was one of the reasons I stopped too.

A better comparison would be "If you were a witch, would you walk into Salem and expect not to be burned?"

Once again, the Yahoos have won.

I suspect it's because of their sheer numbers.

 

[rue]

That was one of the reasons I stopped too.

A better comparison would be "If you were a witch, would you walk into Salem and expect not to be burned?"

Yeah, but the Salem I walked into was a new town, so to speak, so I had no idea. It was about 5 years ago when I started and a little over a year ago when I stopped.

I'm sorry you had to shut yours down too

 

[rue]

Once again, the Yahoos have won.

Sadly they do.

I suspect it's because of their sheer numbers.

Yup.

 

[C-dot]

Yeah, but the Salem I walked into was a new town, so to speak, so I had no idea. It was about 5 years ago when I started and a little over a year ago when I stopped.

I'm sorry you had to shut yours down too

It was shortly after I had to start moderating my comments. I, for one, would have enjoyed your blog!

Maybe more people should subscribe to Scott Michael's philosophy (the undisputed king of receiving cyber-hate):

"If the material and/or my editorials offend you then please take responsibility for your own internet surfing habits instead of blaming the messenger. Theres a little X in the upper right hand corner of your monitor for a reason, use that instead of the book marking tool."

 

[Lady Day]

That's exactly why I stopped blogging. It was a simple blog about my family life and when the audience grew, the trolls came out and that was the end. It's a sad state of affairs when people are so bored with their own lives that they spend time critiquing someone else's life or in this case making fun of someone's wedding.

That began to happen on my blog when I opened it up to anonymous comments...for three days. I shut that stuff down quick, then made a post to the tune of 'If you are going to talk smack about me then take credit for it and say it to my face.' I'm pretty good at hunting down an internet trail, and most anonymous people don't want that.

I was raised with the notion of you take credit for what you say, good or bad. That way if you are harshly corrected, you will know that you need to think before you speak.

LD

 

[sheeplady]

The studies that they have done have shown that 95% of the "flaming" is done by 5% of users. Which means that there are a few hyper-nasty people out there who have to ruin it for everyone else.

I think I see what you are saying C-dot. While it's not right about what happened to them, it has happened before. I think that if they had thought about the possible ramifications of posting their wedding before they posted it, then perhaps they would have been better prepared, at least mentally.

It's a bit like mental "self defense"- you need to be aware of what could happen and be prepared for it to happen, just for your own safety. We don't teach people self defense so that they can carry the blame for an attack- we teach them so that they are more prepared heaven forbid it happens. The fault lies on the attacker, but that doesn't mean that we can't prepare ourselves and increase our chances of survival.

 

[rue]

That began to happen on my blog when I opened it up to anonymous comments...for three days. I shut that stuff down quick, then made a post to the tune of 'If you are going to talk smack about me then take credit for it and say it to my face.' I'm pretty good at hunting down an internet trail, and most anonymous people don't want that.

I was raised with the notion of you take credit for what you say, good or bad. That way if you are harshly corrected, you will know that you need to think before you speak.

LD

I confronted them and they wouldn't stop so it had to end [huh] I'm glad you still are able to keep blogging though LD, because I'm a reader

 

[C-dot]

I think I see what you are saying C-dot. While it's not right about what happened to them, it has happened before. I think that if they had thought about the possible ramifications of posting their wedding before they posted it, then perhaps they would have been better prepared, at least mentally.

YES. And they made the classic mistake that targets make - Trying to justify themselves to the helots. Throwing gasoline into the flames, so to speak.